Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1158 (MAD)

Backwater Stainless Pvt. Ltd. , rep. by its Director Vikas Gupta, Kerala v. Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin

2015-02-26

K.RAVICHANDRA BAABU

body2015
Judgment :- 1. The petitioner is aggrieved against the order of the second respondent dated 14.11.2014 whereby the petitioner was directed to pay differential duty amount of Rs.5,61,686/- apart from executing a bond for Rs.45,21,129/- and furnishing bank guarantee for Rs.10,00,000/-, for the provisional release of the goods. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner has already paid the differential duty claimed under the impugned proceedings on 31.10.2014 and they are also willing to execute the bond as directed by the respondents and however, furnishing of the bank guarantee for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- is causing great hardship to them, since the liability to pay the fine and penalty is yet to be adjudicated upon. 4. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that such order is passed only to safeguard the interest of the Revenue, so that, the duty, fine and penalty liability from the petitioner could be recovered in the event of their failure in the adjudication proceedings. 5. It is seen that the respondents are agreeable for provisional release of the subject matter of the goods, however, subject to three conditions as stated supra. Insofar as the first condition is concerned namely, payment of differential duty of Rs.5,61,866/-, admittedly, the petitioner has paid the said sum on 31.10.2014. The petitioner is also willing to execute the bond as directed by the respondents. Therefore, the only dispute is with regard to the furnishing of bank guarantee for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-. 6. Considering the fact that the petitioner has already paid differential duty and also willing to execute the bond as directed by the respondents, I am of the view that the interest of the Revenue will be safeguarded if the conditions imposed in the impugned order is modified to the effect that the petitioner shall execute the bond for a sum of Rs.50,21,129/- and give a bank guarantee for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- with self renewal clause. 7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to accept the bond for a sum of Rs.50,21,129/- and also bank guarantee for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from the petitioner and consequently, on compliance of those conditions, the respondents shall release the goods provisionally without any further delay. 7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to accept the bond for a sum of Rs.50,21,129/- and also bank guarantee for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from the petitioner and consequently, on compliance of those conditions, the respondents shall release the goods provisionally without any further delay. The petitioner shall furnish the bond and bank guarantee as stated supra within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such receipt of such bond and bank guarantee, the respondents shall release the goods provisionally, within a period of seven days, thereafter. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.